https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71940
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71937
--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
All currently supported gcc versions are affected.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71937
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71940
Bug ID: 71940
Summary: .rela.plt info is pointing to .got.plt while it should
point .plt
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69560
Mike Hommey changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mh+gcc at glandium dot org
--- Comment #12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67164
--- Comment #11 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Jul 20 05:06:52 2016
New Revision: 238507
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238507&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/67164 - clean up dead code
* pt.c (iterative_hash
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71939
Bug ID: 71939
Summary: sole flexible array member in an anonymous structure
rejected
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66319
--- Comment #21 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2016-07-19, at 1:23 PM, bugzilla-gcc at thewrittenword dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66319
>
> --- Comment #20 from The Written Word com> ---
> (In reply to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71856
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Jul 19 22:16:23 2016
New Revision: 238498
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238498&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Do not define _GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS in Parallel Mode
PR libstdc++/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70568
--- Comment #4 from Pat Haugen ---
(In reply to acsawdey from comment #3)
> Tracked this back to 210824, and in particular this change:
>
> @@ -860,10 +897,15 @@
> }
> }
>
> - /* If th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71935
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Likely r197053.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71937
--- Comment #4 from Jean-Michel Dubois ---
Created attachment 38937
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38937&action=edit
preprocessed files
Here are the processed files. I will try with gcc 5.4 to morrow morning.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71935
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Index: check.c
===
--- check.c (revision 238385)
+++ check.c (working copy)
@@ -4278,7 +4278,7 @@ is_c_interoperable (gfc_expr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71937
--- Comment #3 from Jean-Michel Dubois ---
The virtual machine has 4 Gb.
[jmd@localhost src]$ free
totalusedfree shared buff/cache available
Mem:3866920 618400 28506083260 39791
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71937
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 71938 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71938
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71937
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||memory-hog
Severity|major
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71902
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6/7 Regression] Unneeded |[5/6 Regression] Unneeded
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71938
Bug ID: 71938
Summary: [4.9.3] failure in cc1plus on very large fuction
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71937
Bug ID: 71937
Summary: [4.9.3] failure in cc1plus on very large fuction
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71902
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Tue Jul 19 21:25:33 2016
New Revision: 238497
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238497&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-07-19 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/71902
* dependen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71936
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vehre at gmx dot de
--- Comment #4 from M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71936
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Status|UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71935
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71916
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71934
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71916
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jul 19 19:55:54 2016
New Revision: 238491
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238491&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/71916
* cfgrtl.c (contains_no_active_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71916
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jul 19 19:54:49 2016
New Revision: 238490
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238490&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/71916
* cfgrtl.c (contains_no_active_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71912
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||69698
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71855
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71855
--- Comment #10 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Tue Jul 19 19:31:24 2016
New Revision: 238489
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238489&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/71855
* dwarf2out.c (gen_subprogram_die): Only
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71855
--- Comment #9 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Tue Jul 19 19:29:42 2016
New Revision: 238488
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238488&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/71855
* dwarf2out.c (gen_subprogram_die): Only c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71936
--- Comment #2 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
To get the whole picture it's necessary to take a look at four
analogous cases with "type" instead of "class". They compile without
an error (v6/v7), but occationally run for a long time (y3/y4).
$ ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71936
--- Comment #1 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
These other two cases produce an related ICE :
$ cat z3.f90
program p
type t
end type
class(t), pointer :: x(:)
allocate (x, mold=f())
deallocate (x)
allocate (x, source=f())
contains
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71899
--- Comment #4 from Daniel Krügler ---
(In reply to Ville Voutilainen from comment #2)
[..]
> I'm also not a fan of the name boolean_testable
Note that no-one yet has made an improved name suggestion for this thingee that
is discussed in LWG 274
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71936
Bug ID: 71936
Summary: ICE in wide_int_to_tree, at tree.c:1487
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71935
Bug ID: 71935
Summary: ICE is_c_interoperable(): gfc_simplify_expr failed
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71934
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Now having PCH around might not be useful anyways. Someone would have to check
to see if anyone uses PCH still.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71934
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Actually you could exactly what is done for darwin targets to get it working on
PIE.
Also what do you mean by disabled? Do you mean not doing a PCH for libstdc++
(there is already an option for that; can't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71874
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jul 19 17:42:26 2016
New Revision: 238487
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238487&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/71874
* builtins.c (fold_builtin_memory_op)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71874
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jul 19 17:39:26 2016
New Revision: 238486
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238486&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/71874
* gimple-fold.c (fold_builtin_memory_o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71874
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jul 19 17:33:58 2016
New Revision: 238485
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238485&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/71874
* gimple-fold.c (fold_builtin_memory_o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71320
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71934
Bug ID: 71934
Summary: pch cannot be disabled so gcc cannot be position
independent
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71874
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jul 19 17:30:05 2016
New Revision: 238484
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238484&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/71874
* gimple-fold.c (fold_builtin_memory_o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66319
--- Comment #20 from The Written Word
---
(In reply to dave.anglin from comment #17)
> On 2016-07-12, at 12:36 PM, bugzilla-gcc at thewrittenword dot com wrote:
>
> >> don't have any ia64 hardware and I also don't have an 11.31 box. So,
> >>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71320
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Jul 19 17:17:05 2016
New Revision: 238483
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238483&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
libstdc++/71320 Add or remove file permissions correctly
Backport from m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71932
--- Comment #3 from Richard Falk ---
Created attachment 38936
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38936&action=edit
Slightly simpler pre-processed C file that demonstrates bug
Slightly simpler in that only one parameter is neede
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71933
Bug ID: 71933
Summary: plugin tests fail when host!=target but tests are run
locally
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71734
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jul 19 16:47:30 2016
New Revision: 238482
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238482&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/71734
* g++.dg/vect/pr70729.cc: Don't includ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71855
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #8 from Aldy Herna
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64945
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
--- Comment #4 from Domin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64945
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64945
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> A test showing the problem is missing. As such the PR is useless for anyone,
> but the reporter.
No feedback, closing as INVALID.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71027
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71320
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Jul 19 16:34:23 2016
New Revision: 238480
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238480&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
libstdc++/71320 Add or remove file permissions correctly
Backport from m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59438
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
*** Bug 68889 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24546
Bug 24546 depends on bug 68889, which changed state.
Bug 68889 Summary: Fortran/DWARF: Possible bug in the handling of
DW_AT_associated
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68889
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68889
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71855
--- Comment #7 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 38935
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38935&action=edit
patch being tested
gen_unspecified_parameters_die() is being called in early dwarf and again for
the same pare
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58667
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The gfortran documentation says
-Wconversion
Warn about implicit conversions that are likely to change the value of the
expression after conversion. Implied by -Wall.
-Wconversion-extra
Warn about im
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71932
--- Comment #2 from Richard Falk ---
Adding "-fno-move-loop-invariants" to the compilation request makes the problem
go away, but I've seen some situations where even this is not sufficient.
A discussion about this bug is in the following thread
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71932
--- Comment #1 from Richard Falk ---
Note that there are minor variations of this code that do not generate a
compiler error but generate bad compiler code, but I no longer have that case
available. Hopefully the fix to this problem will also fi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71688
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Jul 19 15:44:56 2016
New Revision: 238477
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238477&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR fortran/71688
2016-07-19 Martin Jambor
PR fortran/71
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71932
Bug ID: 71932
Summary: internal compiler error: in push_reload, at
reload.c:1360
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71688
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Jul 19 15:40:43 2016
New Revision: 238476
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238476&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR fortran/71688
2016-07-19 Martin Jambor
PR fortran/71
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367
Bug 54367 depends on bug 62052, which changed state.
Bug 62052 Summary: function parameter has wrong address in lambda converted to
pointer-to-function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62052
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62052
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71855
--- Comment #6 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Some idiot wrote this:
commit 3a1c9df24981c5068334726a0d92fd80c455eb6e
Author: aldyh
Date: Fri Jun 5 18:44:53 2015 +
Merge debug-early branch into mainline.
...
And that's where it all started
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71769
--- Comment #6 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to nightstrike from comment #5)
> Could you backport to the branches?
Well, that's release manager's call. Richard?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71855
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|6.1.0 |7.0
--- Comment #5 from Aldy Hernandez
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71916
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #14
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71769
--- Comment #5 from nightstrike ---
Could you backport to the branches?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71916
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 38933
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38933&action=edit
gcc7-pr71916.patch
I'll test this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71916
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
This looks like a bug in handling of __builtin_unreachable (in RTL basic blocks
without successors) during cross-jumping in jump2 pass.
In *.csa there are 2 such basic blocks in the IL, but in *.jump2 only o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71855
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86-64-Linux
Status|UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71855
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71916
--- Comment #12 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 38932
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38932&action=edit
--dbg-cnt="registered_jump_thread:4" dump
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71916
--- Comment #11 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 38931
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38931&action=edit
--dbg-cnt="registered_jump_thread:3" dump
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71916
--- Comment #10 from Martin Liška ---
Couple of observations:
1) the second test-case triggers undefined behavior in:
g[i] = 9;
/home/marxin/Programming/testcases/pr71916-2-original.c:20:8: runtime error:
index 4 out of bounds for type 'cha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68854
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71703
--- Comment #6 from Tom ---
I'll have a go. Not sure how much time I'll get to put into it.
On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 at 13:55 dominiq at lps dot ens.fr <
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71703
>
> ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71920
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71916
--- Comment #9 from Qirun Zhang ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #7)
> Hm, the second test-case works fine with r233209, but started to fail with
> r236831:
>
> Author: law
> Date: Fri May 27 16:32:38 2016 +
>
> * tree-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71930
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
> > But this is a dup of PR 67023 anyway.
> >
> > *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 67023 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71921
--- Comment #5 from Arjan van de Ven ---
I don't think that's completely true; it does use maxss (the non-vector one)
for this code, so at least something thinks its safe to use max, just likely
that something is after the vector phase?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71916
--- Comment #8 from Richard Henderson ---
(gdb) call debug_cfi_row(cur_row)
.cfi_def_cfa 7, 16
.cfi_offset 3, -16
.cfi_offset 16, -8
(gdb) call debug_cfi_row(ti->beg_row)
.cfi_def_cfa 7, 8
.cfi_offset 16, -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59438
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Related to/ duplicate of pr71906?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71906
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Related to/ duplicate of pr59438?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71930
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
> But this is a dup of PR 67023 anyway.
>
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 67023 ***
Which I've pointed you to before:
https://gcc.gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71930
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67023
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||noloader at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71703
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> ICE started with GCC 4.8.0, former releases report:
>
> /home/marxin/Programming/testcases/pr71073.f90:6.14:
>
> class(*), allocatable :: a
> 1
> Fatal Error: Unlimited polymorphism
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71930
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey Walton ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> (1) so what?
I suppose I should thank my lucky stars g++ did not invoke the preprocessor for
Fortran or Java then.
Maybe GCC could make it round robin so defin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71930
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(1) so what? The behavior for - input without -x is the same for all drivers.
gfortran -E - will not preprocess as if it is Fortran source, gcj -E - will not
preprocess as if it is a Java source (after all,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71734
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 38930
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38930&action=edit
gcc7-pr71734.patch
The bug is of course in using (uselessly) an x86_64/i?86 specific intrinsic
headers in a gen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71930
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey Walton ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> What makes you think that this is a bug?
I think its a bug (1) g++ is being used, and (2) -std=c++17 is being used. What
does a file extension have to do with a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71930
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71931
Bug ID: 71931
Summary: build sysroot flags are not passed to target lib tests
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71930
Bug ID: 71930
Summary: g++ invokes the wrong preprocessor
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: driver
1 - 100 of 144 matches
Mail list logo
